Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

First of all there is no so called Hindu issm because there is no issm in Sanathana Dharma. Secondly there is nothing regressive in the present "issm" to create something progressive. "Ruth" name of the people. It is like Burkha telling us that she is also a Hindu.

^^^ no disagreements... but just cautionary points that can be carelessly disregarded -

1. The 'pure searchers' all eventually slip the slipper slope of 'who arbitrates the purity?' In plain English - who is to judge who as green, white or saffron enough. Search for purity and perfection is an affliction! So even Burkha (irrespective of my personal distaste has her right to her path and claim to it)

2. Sanathana Dharma is sanathana because of a framework that enables adjustment to context and time period. My caution is only in applying a Western framework blindly to this process... Modern, Regressive, Progressive all come loaded with framework confusion in the Sanathana Dharma context. Dharma is neither about Purity nor is it about Perfection. Dharma is just a system that works for us, if we take care of it.

This is nothing new, of course. Malthusian fears of a Muslim takeover of India have been a core part of the Hindutva agenda for almost a century now. After the 2002 Gujarat pogrom, for example, Narendra Modi characterised the violence-affected Muslims in riot camps as “baby-producing factories”.

After he formed the government at the Centre, these fears have come to the fore in the form of pronouncements by various Bharatiya Janata Party leaders who want Hindu women to have greater numbers of children in order to boost the community’s numbers.

In January, just before the Delhi assembly elections, the 2011 Census’ figures on religion were conveniently leaked to newspapers.

Unfortunately, these feverish demographic projections generate far more heat than light. As the charts below show, actual data on this issue would hardly support the sort of fears that the Sangh Parivar plays up.

Bogey #1: Muslims will overtake HindusThis is an extremely popular notion in the Sangh Parivar. Before the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's statement on Saturday, this was last bought up in February by the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Sadhvi Prachi, who accused Muslims of giving birth to “40 dogs” each and “trying to convert Hindustan into Darul Islam”.

Drumming up of fears of a minority swamping a majority is standard right wing political strategy and it is no different in India.

Indeed, Muslim population growth rates are higher than the corresponding figure for the Hindu community. If one were to accepted that the leaked figures from the 2011 Census are accurate, Hindus grew at an average annual rate of 1.4% between 2001 and 2011. For Muslims, the corresponding figure was 2.2%.

If we assume both communities continue to grow at this rate, Muslims will catch up with Hindus by 2220 ‒ in around 200 years.

Accepting these growth rates, at the time Muslims outnumber Hindus, India’s population will be 3,264 crore. Now you know that is a lot of people but let’s see just how much.

At these rates, for Muslims to overtake Hindus, India’s population would need to be almost five times the current global population. In other words, this is clearly an impossible scenario.

More logically, at some point in the future, Muslim growth rates will slow down and the population will stabilise. This, in fact, is already happening. While from 1991 to 2001, the Indian Muslim population grew by 29.3%, in the period 2001-2011, it grew by 24.4% – a fall, therefore, of almost 5 percentage points.

The Sachar Committee Report, taking this falling growth rate into account, has estimated that the Muslim proportion will stabilise at between 17% and 21% of the Indian population by 2100. A far cry from some of the doomsday scenarios being painted.

Bogey #2: The Muslim growth rate is abnormalThe extremely poor economic conditions of Muslims in India are cited by many liberals and left wingers as the prime reason for their high population growth rate. However, the Hindutva explanation for this growth, expectedly, blames religious factors and dismisses the economic drivers.As this chart below shows, depending on how you segment the data, a number of other disadvantaged population groups have growth rates similar to the Muslim growth rate.Moreover, since Muslim infant mortality is lower than other population segments, this effect can even be seen in the Total Fertility Rate (or number of births per woman).The Muslim Total Fertility Rate is, as expected, higher than that for Hindus and Christian. But when we segment the population socio-economically, we see that Muslims manage to be better off than people without any education or the poorest fifth of India’s population by wealth.Clearly then, economic and educational factors seem to the major driver at play here.We could also disprove the Hindutva groups’ religious argument by looking at the global scene. Iran, for example, achieved replacement level fertility (with each new generation being less populous than the one before) in 2002, a goal India will only reach in 2020. With a population that is more than 90% Muslim, Bangladesh has a TFR not only lower than India’s overall but also lower than India’s Hindus.

Bogey #3: Bangladeshi ImmigrationAccusations of large-scale Bangladeshi immigration are a hot-button issue for the right wing now, another supposed driver of the alleged Muslim population boom, along with polygamy (which in itself is untrue). So critical, in fact, that Modi thought that the Assam government was culling rhinos in order to make way for immigrants.If, as alleged, such large-scale immigration was taking place from Bangladesh to Assam and West Bengal, the Muslim population in those two states would tend to show abnormal growth. But the data shows nothing of that sort.Assam’s Muslim population, for example, grew at the same rate as India’s Muslim population between 1991 and 2001 and West Bengal’s Muslim population, in fact, grew slower. The abnormal growth rate that Assam’s and West Bengal’s Muslim populations should show, given the alleged massive Bangladeshi immigration, simply has not happened.In the rough and tumble of India’s politics, religious rhetoric often goes a long way electorally. It is therefore not surprising that, in spite of the mountains of contrary data, the Sangh Parivar's demographic scaremongering has managed to achieve a significant amount of tractio

There is an ongoing battle occurring at many levels relative to the concept of India and what India is, was and is meant to be. This is not merely a scholarly debate to arrive at truth but resembles more a struggle for power. Whoever controls the idea of India, as presented at media, education and government levels, to a great extent controls the country along with its resources, and shapes its future.

In this debate about India, the term Bharat – which is the correct and long term name for the country – is usually left out, as that would immediately change the tenor of the discussion.

Bharat is the traditional name of India and is enshrined in the constitution, showing that those framed the constitution were aware of the importance of the term and its equivalence for India as a whole. Article 1(1) of the constitution states, “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.”

If we use the term Bharat for India a number of issues of the nature and identity of the country are automatically solved. Bharat is the name of India in the region’s literature going back to Vedic times and shows a continuity of the country for thousands of years.

If we look at India only since 1947, we start with the idea of partition and tend to build upon it with further partitions and divisions of culture, people and language, each with its own separate identity. Those who are biased against the older history of India avoid the term Bharat so that they can redefine India today as if it no real past as a country before 1947, which allows them to turn the country into what they would like it to be, with no specific culture of its own.

Some modern thinkers say that India as a country was invented by the British during the period of colonial rule, who put together under a single administration the diverse group of peoples, countries, cultures and languages of the subcontinent, which overall had little in common to begin with. Other credit the Moguls (who called India “Hindustan”) for providing some sense of national unity to the far flung land.

If we use the term Bharat, no one can say that there is no unity of culture, civilization or history to the region. Bharat implies a history of the country going back to the famous Vedic emperor Bharata, one of the early kings in the ancient Puru dynasty said to have reigned long before Rama, Krishna or Buddha.

Bharatiya Samskriti: The Culture of Dharma

Indian culture translates as “Bharatiya Samskriti” in the older terminology of the region, which also explains a lot as to what it is. Indian culture is not something invented over the last century or two and enshrined in the intellectual circles of modern Delhi. Indian culture is Bharatiya Samskriti, the culture of Bharat.

Samskrit is not simply a language but a way of culture and refinement, and a body of knowledge. The idea of Bharatiya Samskriti naturally brings back the culture of Bharatiya or Indian classical music, dance, poetry, philosophy, medicine, mathematics and science, and aims at a renaissance for them in the modern age. It includes the Prakrits or regional languages of the country as well as their cultural traditions, which are all linked together.

The culture of classical India or Bharatiya Samskriti is first of all a culture of dharma. It is built upon an effort to understand the dharma of all life and all aspects of human life and culture. This dharmic culture embraces a pluralism of spiritual paths, including the many sects of Hinduism, as well as Buddhists, Jain, and Sikhs and can be extended to anyone who honors a pluralistic view and respect for the whole of life.

Who are those who uphold the culture of Bharata or Bharatiya Samskriti in India today? It is not the English language media or even most of academia. These groups may address aspects of the traditional culture, but usually in a fragmentary manner, forgetting the overall connections, examining local folk customs in isolation for example. Or they may denigrate the idea that there was any overriding culture for the region as a whole.

Those who uphold the culture of Bharat are now on the periphery and often criticized as narrow minded or out of date, though the dharmic culture of classical India or Bharat cultivated a broader view of life and consciousness than what we see in predominant modern ideologies and educational trends. Yet these voices of Bharat can still be heard and are making their present felt again.

This means that there is no need to create a new Indian culture post-independence in order to bring unity and identity to the country. The need is to honor the ongoing continuity of Bharatiya and Dharmic culture, its relevance for the future and its ability to adapt itself to the times, including its capacity to embrace and integrate diverse views. If India is a free and democratic country today, it is because of its history as Bharat.

Yet Dharmic culture is not confined to the boundaries of any political or religious system or dogma. This Bharatiya Dharmic culture was not limited to the subcontinent of India but spread throughout Asia and influenced Europe and much of the rest of the world as well. Yet it was in Bharat itself that this characteristic dharmic civilization most took root and survived.

Bharatiya culture is largely a culture of knowledge and promotes learning, considering meditation as the most important form of study that one can do. The symbol of Bharatiya culture is the Yogi or Buddha sitting in meditation pose. This dharmic culture of knowledge can embrace science as well as spirituality and sees consciousness as the underlying ground of the entire universe. The Bharatiya tradition of learning and knowledge is the basis for the success of India’s diaspora in the US, UK and western world.

There are those who say that India is an inclusive concept but Bharat is communal because it is mainly Hindu, though Hindu Dharma itself has a pluralistic and respectful view of life. But traditional Bharat never tried to invade and conquer other countries. There us no history of wars of religious conquest or conversion by Bharatiya armies, or any Bharata based colonial rule and exploitation of other lands.

The Bharatiya model is an excellent model for the modern era in which we must integrate a number of cultures from throughout the world. Compared to the inclusive and synthetic Bharatiya model of culture, socialist and Marxist models are narrow, repressive and materialistic. Even the capitalist model lacks the depth of the dharmic approach and its sense of compassion.

What should be our model for defining India, if not Bharata? Is it China, the Soviet Union, the EU or the USA? Is it Nehruvian socialism, Bengali communism, European nationalism, or American consumerism? These may have some benefits but reflect much more circumscribed views of human life and culture.

Mahabharata

Bharat has the longest and most extensive literary continuity of any modern country or culture. This extends through its massive Sanskrit literature to the main local languages from Tamil to Hindi, which are linked to Sanskrit, and often have larger literatures of their own than the literature of modern European countries.

The concept of Bharata as comprising the entire subcontinent of India is clear in the Mahabharata itself, which is over two thousand years old. The Mahabharata embraces every portion of greater India from Sri Lanka in the South to Uttara Kuru or the lands beyond the Himalayas to the north.

The Mahabharata is not just a story of ancient kings but outlines the kingdoms, countries and cultures of the region. It reflects all the main sects of Hindu Dharma as Vaishnava, Shaiva, Ganapata, and Shakta but also honors freedom of thought and inquiry, with extensive dialogues examining numerous subjects, spiritual and mundane. It discusses the rule and laws of kings and the role of dharma in all aspects of life. No other country or region, whether Europe, China or the Middle East, has a text of such extent and a continuity of culture as the Mahabharata.

The Mahabharata looks back on the older Vedic tradition, which originated in the Sarasvati region of North India over five thousand years ago, when the Sarasvati was a great river. Yet today it is in Kerala in the South that we find the strictest adherence to Vedic rituals and practices, showing the extent of influence of this ancient culture.

The Battle Over History

A nation is largely defined according to its history. There is a great battle, if not tamaasha, going on relative to the history of India. After independence, history studies and national institutions, such as the ICHR (Indian Council of Historical Research) were dominated by socialists, if not Marxists, who were naturally hostile to the older dharmic culture of the region.

Their goal was to emphasize a new India defined in the post-independence era that was removed from its traditional past. There were a few traditional figures like Ashok and Akbar who were brought in as historical precedents of their idea of India, but much of the history of the country was ignored. When the greatness of India’s past, such as the extensive urban sites along the ancient Sarasvati River were discovered, this largely Delhi intelligentsia found little to be proud of or made known. The older Vedic period was reduced and not made into anything foundational for India as a whole. It was treated as a limited culture said to originate from outside of India in Central Asia.

Today the Archaeological Survey of India and Geological Survey of India have placed the Vedic period on a firm footing, showing a continuity of culture in the Sarasvati region from the beginnings of agriculture before 7000 BCE to the drying up of the Sarasvati River around 1900 BC.

We can identify the early Vedic period with the period from 7000-3100 BCE. Curiously when the Greek scholar Megasthenes visited India along with Alexander’s armies, he noted a tradition of 153 kings going back over 6400 years to a date of around 6776 BCE. This suggests a continuity of dynasties in the region going back a very long time.

We can identify the late Vedic period from 3100-1900 BCE with the urban Harappan period, in which the Sarasvati River was already in decline, which is how we find the river described in several later Brahmana texts, in Mahabharata and in Manu Smriti.

The New Battle for Delhi

Delhi is the seat of government in India. But it is also the main center for the English language media and academia in the country, which often uncritically reflects the opinions of its western education and values. This Delhi intelligentsia has had the main role in defining India in recent decades, though the culture of Delhi, particularly of its ruling elite, is very different from the culture of most of the country.

The Delhi elite has redefined India largely in a Nehruvian-socialist-Marxist image, mainly as India after 1947. They have tried to make classical India into a foreign culture or something merely regional, while glorifying recent political trends in the West as capable of defining and raising up India as a modern nation.

Even today we have well known communists appearing in the media, pretending to be defenders of India and examples of intellectual thinking, tolerance and compassion, though their comrades throughout the world have largely been thrown out of power, with their views discredited.

The Post-Marxist Era and the Twenty First Century

We need to redefine India in the post-colonial, post-Marxist era, which requires the rediscovery of Bharat. While India did throw off the British rule at an outer level in 1947, the rule of colonial based concepts, biases and institutions continued. These were gradually combined with Marxist and leftist concepts that maintained the denigration of the older dharmic culture of the region.

The great majority of Marxist countries in the world came to an end in the period from 1989-1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies. China has moved away from a Marxist orientation and is now reembracing its Confucian past. Russia once more emulates the Czars and the Russian Orthodox Church. Yet India’s intellectuals continue to promote Marxist ideas in India’s universities as if Marxism were still an important and innovative trend in world thought.

India Resurgent as Bharat

India today in the twenty first century is becoming resurgent as Bharat, because that is the actual foundation of the country through its enduring culture throughout the centuries.

India’s great dharmic traditions – including Yoga, Vedanta, Buddhism and Ayurveda – have gained respect throughout the world, with millions of followers in every continent. It is this older dharmic culture of Bharat that the world looks up to and hopes India develops, not the recent India of the Nehru dynasty.

Economically speaking, India is rising up today only by casting off the Marxist-Nehruvian-socialist yoke and embracing its own older Vaishya, merchant and dharmic economic traditions, which are similarly an integral part of Bharat. India was not poor when it was Bharat. It became poor when it ceased to be Bharat.

Bharat Mata as Mother India

The land of Bharat has always been regarded as Bharat Mata, Mother India. This is not a cultural concept defined by aggression, intolerance, and materialism, but one that honors Mother Earth and Mother Nature and sees culture as a mother who nurtures us, not as a social control mechanism.

Bharat Mata is also Yoga Mata and regards human culture as a movement towards Yoga and the evolution of consciousness, such as Sri Aurobindo so eloquently proclaimed. Bharat Mata is Ma Durga, the protective force the takes us from darkness to light. She is Bharata Bhavani, Mother India as the mother of life and culture. Bharat Mata embodies the Yoga Shakti or power of spiritual striving in humanity. She is not the imposition of a religious concept upon the country but a poetic/spiritual representation of the soul of its people and its dharmic ethos.

Bharat was traditionally Vishvaguru or the world guru among nations for many centuries. People came from throughout Asia and the Middle East to study at its great centers of learning like Takshashila and Nalanda. Bharat was famous for its spiritual and scientific knowledge but also for its art, philosophy, medicine, mathematics, and material prosperity.

Bharat remained prosperous until the period of British rule, showing that the colonial rulers did not raise India up but pulled it down. Colonial rulers tried to remove Bharat and in its place substitute an artificial idea of India, made according to their own biases, which they therefore had the right to rule.

Bharat Mata can be the Vishvaguru or the world guru, but India as defined by the last hundred years only cannot. It is time for Bharat to arise again and awaken the world to a greater destiny and higher awareness that goes back to its great ancient seers and yogis. A resurgent Bharat is of tremendous value for the entire world, if not essential for the future of humanity.

However, as educators who pay particular attention to history, we remind Mr. Modi’s audiences of the powerful reasons for him being denied the right to enter the U.S. from 2005-2014, for there is still an active case in Indian courts that questions his role in the Gujarat violence of 2002 when 1,000 died. Modi’s first year in office as the Prime Minister of India includes well publicized episodes of censorship and harassment of those critical of his policies, bans and restrictions on NGOs leading to a constriction of the space of civic engagement, ongoing violations of religious freedom, and a steady impingement on the independence of the judiciary

Signed,

Meena Alexander, Distinguished Professor of English, Hunter College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York

Arjun Appadurai, Paulette Goddard Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication, New York University

Talks of the connections these jerks have in high places including the fact that

a) Amartya Sen is her palb) Nandana Sen, his daughter is married to some makinson who is the CEO of Penguin internationalc) assorted other characters who are in high places (David Davidar (left after a scandal to form aleph books), Ravi Singh,

Also mentions an illegal scheme this jerk makinson had of wanting to smuggle the books in soap cases (around 11:00).

BTW, for a so-called sanskrit "scholar", her pronunciation of any Indian word is atrocious. Also check out her Sanskrit translation of "Malhotra" as "filthy priest" at 25:00. What a vile execrable excuse for humanity this witch is.

I don't know. My second cousin twice removed knows two of his students who are quite rational. My second cuz also had a run in with the Anias Loomba and Suvir Kaul pair . My second cuz used to study algs. with another chaired professor in the UPenn CS who my cuz believes is in noway would ever join the Peoples' republic of Berkeley (Haas chapter) (TM Raja Bose ji).

Last edited by Vayutuvan on 29 Aug 2015 07:10, edited 1 time in total.

BTW, if you want to do some interesting pisko-analysis: Sampath Kannan is also gay. I have found that some other twitter Modi haters may also be gay because, for instance, some well known sickular (both love and peace varietals) enthusiastically re-tweeted the NSFW series of "buggery in the Ottoman caliphate" tweets and pics that our very own parikramah posted a week or two ago, including the pics . Now why Modi-hating "left liberals" would so enthusiastically RT buggery art by a Hindutvadin is one of the many mysteries of the universe. A simple explanation would be that they are *ahem*. Not much of a data set I know, but wonder if there is something there...

Ayyo! No offense intended. Fully support LGBT rights including marriage. But still curious if they as a group have certain ideas just like other groups (women, lovers, peaceful etc). Such patterns may help develop insights why certain people full of hate. Ultimately, just as homophobia is to be eschewed, so should Modiphobia, RSSphobia etc.

But these hum-any-ts folks talk a lot of ideology but in their heart of the heart probably are very catholic/protestant in that they believe all culture is in Sistine Chapel or flowed out of Florence, Paris, London and all intellect is concentrated in Oxbridge.

Most are from Mount Holyoke, Barnard, Wellesley, Yale, Columbia and such. Some of these are "women only" liberal arts colleges where people pay top dollar to study "art History". Columbia did not admit any women as late as early 80s.

Some of these confused professors are de-racinated enough and equate fundu religions with hindu.

MurthyB wrote:BTW, if you want to do some interesting pisko-analysis: Sampath Kannan is also gay. I have found that some other twitter Modi haters may also be gay because, for instance, some well known sickular (both love and peace varietals) enthusiastically re-tweeted the NSFW series of "buggery in the Ottoman caliphate" tweets and pics that our very own parikramah posted a week or two ago, including the pics . Now why Modi-hating "left liberals" would so enthusiastically RT buggery art by a Hindutvadin is one of the many mysteries of the universe. A simple explanation would be that they are *ahem*. Not much of a data set I know, but wonder if there is something there...

The reason they retweeted is because the tweets were worded academically to show how surprisingly liberal and tolerant "true" Islam really can be. Since "secular" non-Muslims are at the forefront of interpreting what "true" Islam really is, this is bait. It causes them to retweet eagerly - and thereby outrage the faithful whom they are acting as advocates for. Also, in their eagerness, it may not have occurred to the liberal retweeters that a lot of the homosexuality in the Caliphate and Sufi circles was actually homosexual pedophilia. Lastly, "liberal" types who typically hate their own religious tradition, often have a nervous glee about the subject of sexuality and release from barriers, IMHO.

India is united. Unity is the mix of all that's ours. All our languages, how small they be from any part of India is ours and need to be cared and supported. To see the opposite we can look at our neighbor Pakistan, by enforcing Urdu on its populace which is a mix of languages of the Hindus and Parsis they have denigrating their own culture and languages. The place where Pakistan stands in the cultural sphere is near to zero. Still trying to be the most Islamic they are trying to adopt Arabic, which indeed is a pagan language.

कर्तव्यम् आचरं कामम् अकर्तव्यम् अनाचरम् |तिष्ठति प्राकॄताचारो य स: आर्य इति स्मॄत: ||; योग वसिष्ठA person who does the things which are to be done and who doesn't do the things which are not to be done; a person who sticks to rational behaviour (or behaves rationally), is called "Arya".The term "Arya" is used to refer to elder or respectable person in India. This subhashita give some of the characteristics of 'Arya'. A person who does the things which he is supposed to do i.e. good things, and does not do any bad, can be called Arya.. In short, the one who obeys dharma is Arya. 'Arya' does not reflect any race.एकेन अपि सुपुत्रेण सिंही स्वपिति निर्भयम् |सह एव दशभि: पुत्रै: भारं वहति गर्दभी ||A lioness having only one cub relaxes as she is assured that her cub will bring the hunt. But the donkey even if having ten children will have to carry her load herself!374

MurthyB wrote:BTW, if you want to do some interesting pisko-analysis: Sampath Kannan is also gay. I have found that some other twitter Modi haters may also be gay because, for instance, some well known sickular (both love and peace varietals) enthusiastically re-tweeted the NSFW series of "buggery in the Ottoman caliphate" tweets and pics that our very own parikramah posted a week or two ago, including the pics . Now why Modi-hating "left liberals" would so enthusiastically RT buggery art by a Hindutvadin is one of the many mysteries of the universe. A simple explanation would be that they are *ahem*. Not much of a data set I know, but wonder if there is something there...

The reason they retweeted is because the tweets were worded academically to show how surprisingly liberal and tolerant "true" Islam really can be. Since "secular" non-Muslims are at the forefront of interpreting what "true" Islam really is, this is bait. It causes them to retweet eagerly - and thereby outrage the faithful whom they are acting as advocates for. Also, in their eagerness, it may not have occurred to the liberal retweeters that a lot of the homosexuality in the Caliphate and Sufi circles was actually homosexual pedophilia. Lastly, "liberal" types who typically hate their own religious tradition, often have a nervous glee about the subject of sexuality and release from barriers, IMHO.

Agreed, but apropos your last point is what I was alluding to: the promise of release from their own closets.

Although I thought the pedophilia was quite evident in your series; they must have missed it in their general horniness

PM Modi's speech at the release of digital version of Ramcharitmanas by All India Radio

He says at around 6 mins; if there is anything the world is jealous of in Bharat, it is that family is the foundation of our life. And the Ramayanam epitomises that. When some of our ancestors were forced to be sent out as slaves to distant lands, their masters took everything from them, but couldn't take away the Ramayanam. He also says that the International Day of Yoga again has made the world sit up and take notice that there is much to still be learnt from Bharat.

Rajiv as always is forthright and brilliant - calls spade a spade. His call out of this characteristic of Hindus/Indians to fight their own countrymen on the side of the British!! And this is going on till today. I sometimes wonder if the oppressive Muslim rule of 700 years before that forced many to look to the British for supposed succour and as a consequence became traitors to their own countrymen. But then that can be challenged by the existence of Jai Chands ( of Prithivi Raj chauhan infamy) in many ages. So there is definitely a need for introspection as to why is this the case. In addition like a statesman he underlines understanding principles and institution building etc

Rajiv as always is forthright and brilliant - calls spade a spade. His call out of this characteristic of Hindus/Indians to fight their own countrymen on the side of the British!! And this is going on till today. I sometimes wonder if the oppressive Muslim rule of 700 years before that forced many to look to the British for supposed succour and as a consequence became traitors to their own countrymen. But then that can be challenged by the existence of Jai Chands ( of Prithivi Raj chauhan infamy) in many ages. So there is definitely a need for introspection as to why is this the case. In addition like a statesman he underlines understanding principles and institution building etc

This mental subversion comes in also due to incorrect historical narrative. After Independence Indian history has been subverted from the British and brown sahibs. Later leftist and commies took it to the next stage of negating Indian history to the extreme. Another experiment on the badgered Indian society was the 'secularism' concept by few social experts. This took Indian intellectuals to new levels of stupidity.